Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Magpie wrote:Having all the units but 1 not move isn't "as fast as possible"

It's models, not units.

The range decreased 6". How is it possible to go faster than that?

My car is at home but I bought the headlights to work, guess my car was going as fast as possible eh?
You're choosing to assume that when the rule says "the unit" it means "the closest model in the unit" for no reason other than you want to. You've decided that's how the rule is, and you're claiming it's an objective, RAW explanation. But it's not. Please stop saying it is.

Except that by the rules, it is the correct interpretation. Here is a related example: I have a combat squad of marines with a single missile launcher and 4 Boltguns. 1 of my models with a boltgun (for whatever reason) moves to get a better line of sight. Suddenly, now my missile launcher model may not fire his weapon? Why? Because the 'unit' counts as having moved. it doesn't matter that the heavy weapon trooper stood stock-still, he cannot fire that turn. A model's movement can and does affect the unit's status as a whole.

As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

Let's be objective here, however -- In the OP's description two units were very close to one another. Fanning the DC just made it easier to get the multi assault. Had the two not been placed near one another, a congaline would not have netted the BA player a double assault, but likely he would have gotten to pick which unit to attack. They disembarked from a Storm Raven, so he prettymuch had free reign that turn. Even when you're fanning out 5-10 infantrymen, in full coherency, they can only stretch out so far and once they take wounds you have to make sure they resume coherency in the following turn.

rigeld2 wrote:Except it is. How do you measure between units?

The rule doesn't say "measure the distance between two units, then move them and measure again". It says you move as fast as possible, which you are choosing to interpret that way. I choose to interprit it as meaning "move each model as far as possible".

tetrisphreak wrote:

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Magpie wrote:Having all the units but 1 not move isn't "as fast as possible"

It's models, not units.

The range decreased 6". How is it possible to go faster than that?

My car is at home but I bought the headlights to work, guess my car was going as fast as possible eh?
You're choosing to assume that when the rule says "the unit" it means "the closest model in the unit" for no reason other than you want to. You've decided that's how the rule is, and you're claiming it's an objective, RAW explanation. But it's not. Please stop saying it is.

Except that by the rules, it is the correct interpretation. Here is a related example: I have a combat squad of marines with a single missile launcher and 4 Boltguns. 1 of my models with a boltgun (for whatever reason) moves to get a better line of sight. Suddenly, now my missile launcher model may not fire his weapon? Why? Because the 'unit' counts as having moved. it doesn't matter that the heavy weapon trooper stood stock-still, he cannot fire that turn. A model's movement can and does affect the unit's status as a whole.

In shooting, yes. Protip- the rage USR is not a shooting attack,and should not be treated as such.

rigeld2 wrote:
As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

Distance between units is irrelevent. You move as fast as possible to the nearest unit, you do NOT move as little as possible. In fact I'd say that was the exact opposite of the RAW.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Magpie wrote:Having all the units but 1 not move isn't "as fast as possible"

It's models, not units.

The range decreased 6". How is it possible to go faster than that?

My car is at home but I bought the headlights to work, guess my car was going as fast as possible eh?
You're choosing to assume that when the rule says "the unit" it means "the closest model in the unit" for no reason other than you want to. You've decided that's how the rule is, and you're claiming it's an objective, RAW explanation. But it's not. Please stop saying it is.

Except that by the rules, it is the correct interpretation. Here is a related example: I have a combat squad of marines with a single missile launcher and 4 Boltguns. 1 of my models with a boltgun (for whatever reason) moves to get a better line of sight. Suddenly, now my missile launcher model may not fire his weapon? Why? Because the 'unit' counts as having moved. it doesn't matter that the heavy weapon trooper stood stock-still, he cannot fire that turn. A model's movement can and does affect the unit's status as a whole.

As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

Let's be objective here, however -- In the OP's description two units were very close to one another. Fanning the DC just made it easier to get the multi assault. Had the two not been placed near one another, a congaline would not have netted the BA player a double assault, but likely he would have gotten to pick which unit to attack. They disembarked from a Storm Raven, so he prettymuch had free reign that turn. Even when you're fanning out 5-10 infantrymen, in full coherency, they can only stretch out so far and once they take wounds you have to make sure they resume coherency in the following turn.

This explanation wins the thread. The most complete and careful explanation of this side of the argument. Now when I play my BAs, tell me how I explain this to my group without sounding like TFG?

Nemesor Dave wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Magpie wrote:Having all the units but 1 not move isn't "as fast as possible"

It's models, not units.

The range decreased 6". How is it possible to go faster than that?

My car is at home but I bought the headlights to work, guess my car was going as fast as possible eh?
You're choosing to assume that when the rule says "the unit" it means "the closest model in the unit" for no reason other than you want to. You've decided that's how the rule is, and you're claiming it's an objective, RAW explanation. But it's not. Please stop saying it is.

Except that by the rules, it is the correct interpretation. Here is a related example: I have a combat squad of marines with a single missile launcher and 4 Boltguns. 1 of my models with a boltgun (for whatever reason) moves to get a better line of sight. Suddenly, now my missile launcher model may not fire his weapon? Why? Because the 'unit' counts as having moved. it doesn't matter that the heavy weapon trooper stood stock-still, he cannot fire that turn. A model's movement can and does affect the unit's status as a whole.

As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

Let's be objective here, however -- In the OP's description two units were very close to one another. Fanning the DC just made it easier to get the multi assault. Had the two not been placed near one another, a congaline would not have netted the BA player a double assault, but likely he would have gotten to pick which unit to attack. They disembarked from a Storm Raven, so he prettymuch had free reign that turn. Even when you're fanning out 5-10 infantrymen, in full coherency, they can only stretch out so far and once they take wounds you have to make sure they resume coherency in the following turn.

This explanation wins the thread. The most complete and careful explanation of this side of the argument. Now when I play my BAs, tell me how I explain this to my group without sounding like TFG?

You can't, because you are. You are CHOOSING to interprit ambiguous rules in a way that is not RAI, nor RAW. I wouldn't play against someone who tried that gak with me.
Unless you'd like to point me to the part in the Rage USR that says "The unit must move as close as possible to the nearest enemy unit.

Nemesor Dave wrote:This explanation wins the thread. The most complete and careful explanation of this side of the argument. Now when I play my BAs, tell me how I explain this to my group without sounding like TFG?

This rule really is one of the most easy to interpret how it's meant to be played.

As mentioned before, I think the move described is perfectly legal, but completely goes against the spirit of the game/rule. As said above you can use it, but you will be TFG. This is the very definition of rules lawyering.

grendel083 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:This explanation wins the thread. The most complete and careful explanation of this side of the argument. Now when I play my BAs, tell me how I explain this to my group without sounding like TFG?

This rule really is one of the most easy to interpret how it's meant to be played.

As mentioned before, I think the move described is perfectly legal, but completely goes against the spirit of the game/rule. As said above you can use it, but you will be TFG. This is the very definition of rules lawyering.

Listen, I get it, I really do. It sucks to play against someone who doesn't have the same spirit of the game as yourself - that's why many of these rules debates crop up in the first place. The conga line tactic is admittedly beardy, and a tournament-style of play that isn't suited for casual games.

But, this is YMDC, where the rules are discussed and dissected. Nothing illegal is presented in the conga line move, but that doesn't make it necessarily the most accepted way to play a rule. Neither does the other interpretation, which requires the raging unit to clump into a nice pie-plate shaped unit ready to be taken out by the first demolisher cannon pointed their way.

The point is that if you are having a game with an opponent using models with rage, for the sake of the game and/or friendship both sides will have to offer leeway to the other to find a happy medium in how the rule operates. In a strict tournament environment, it will come down to the TO's ruling, but RAW has conga lines being a probable avenue.

But, would it be legal in the following situation...

Librarian 1" away - Landspeeder 2" away. The DC move to be as close as possible to the librarian, 1". Then through assault they manage to net both the libby and the speeder with a multiassault. The assault distance to the libby was 1", the assault to the speeder was 2". Doesn't that mean that the DC have not satisfied the requirement as moving towards the closest unit? They've moved towards a unit that was not the closest. Where as in the other example, both targets are about equidistant. Or by explanations in this thread, can I move a single model in the unit 6 inches towards my "closest", move for coherency, then assault a target up to 6" away from that target?

I do agree with the fact that this is probably not acceptable casual play.

Testify wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:
As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

This explanation wins the thread. The most complete and careful explanation of this side of the argument. Now when I play my BAs, tell me how I explain this to my group without sounding like TFG?

You can't, because you are. You are CHOOSING to interprit ambiguous rules in a way that is not RAI, nor RAW. I wouldn't play against someone who tried that gak with me.
Unless you'd like to point me to the part in the Rage USR that says "The unit must move as close as possible to the nearest enemy unit.

Testify wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Except it is. How do you measure between units?

The rule doesn't say "measure the distance between two units, then move them and measure again". It says you move as fast as possible, which you are choosing to interpret that way. I choose to interprit it as meaning "move each model as far as possible".

First you have to find the closest unit - this is done by measuring between units.
Then you move the unit. Moving one model is a perfectly legal move.
You then measure to see if your movement to the closest unit got as close as you could.
If not, it's an illegal move.

How is that not a valid interpretation?

rigeld2 wrote:
As others and myself have pointed out, distances between units are measured from closest model to closest model. Page 3. There is no rule written that says each model in a raging unit must move full advance towards the enemy, but rather the "unit" must do so. Therefore congalines and fanning out are both valid, legal tactics to help mitigate rage.

Distance between units is irrelevent. You move as fast as possible to the nearest unit, you do NOT move as little as possible. In fact I'd say that was the exact opposite of the RAW.

might want to double check - pretty sure that's not my quote.
Also, distance is absolutely not irrelevant - how do you tell if you've broken the rage rule? Just by judging intent? That's completely unworkable.

The counter-arguement is simply "Yes it says that in the rules, but I do not like it and would call you names and be rude if you followed them" so far as I can tell.

Why is measuring distance to the unit brought up?
This is NOT what the rule wants. At least not when the target is already determined.
Rage wants as fast not as close.

Macok wrote:Why is measuring distance to the unit brought up?
This is NOT what the rule wants. At least not when the target is already determined.
Rage wants as fast not as close.

So how do you determine speed?
The only quantifiable measurement is distance before and distance after.

Macok wrote:Why is measuring distance to the unit brought up?
This is NOT what the rule wants. At least not when the target is already determined.
Rage wants as fast not as close.

This.
Nowhere do the rules say "move as close as possible" therefore assuming that is required is not RAW since there is no RAW.
Some people just enjoy cheating other people.

Not sure, but I know I can move 1 model faster then say 10 models.

How are you measuring speed (to be faster) without measuring distance?

You do realize they are intrisically linked, right?

Editing in something useful, since rigeld2 beat me to it:

There is nothing wrong with not liking a rule and playing otherwise. I bet I can name a rule almost everyone breaks every game and would be upset if I did NOT.

Just be honest about it.

I say it is illigal, on the basis that the unit must move as fast as possible.

To me it is as simple as if you only move one model that is not as fast as possible. To me it is not a matter of being TFG, or RAW, or rules lawyering, it is just plain against the rules.

The rules that refer to one model moving are all to do with the minimum amount of movment required, this is about the oposite end of that spectrum, the maximum amount of movement possible. To me the whole unit must move as close as it legaly can to the unit that is closest, in a strait line.

I can see why people are arguing the oposite, but to me that is just wilfully abusing the fact that 40k rules are not written like a law book inorder to keep them from getting too complex. Its like the people who try and point the whole squad away from the closest unit and abuse the "in view" element of the rule, saying "for LoS you need to be facing"

If someone tryed that on me I would smile, nod, politly dissagree, finish the game and never play them again. I mean, people are arguing the interpritation of the word "fastest" to justify this.

Electro wrote:I say it is illigal, on the basis that the unit must move as fast as possible.

Define fast. You don't even need to use the rulebook to do so. Go ahead, I'll wait.

The rules that refer to one model moving are all to do with the minimum amount of movment required, this is about the oposite end of that spectrum, the maximum amount of movement possible. To me the whole unit must move as close as it legaly can to the unit that is closest, in a strait line.

And the unit does - look at the rules for measuring between units.

I mean, people are arguing the interpritation of the word "fastest" to justify this.

It's not an interpretation - it's the definition.

the unit must move as fast as possible.

We know what a unit is.

Q: What is as fast as possible?

A: Covering the most distance in the shortest amount of time.

well the time is 1 movement phase, this we know.

So the most distance one unit can cover is 6" (Less if in DT depending on your roll of 2D6)

So the unit must move 6", this 6" move must be towards the closest visible enemy.

If the unit ends up 6" closer to the enemy (Less if in DT depending on your roll of 2D6) then the unit has moved as fast as possible and we have satisfied the Rage USR.

Happyjew wrote:Not sure, but I know I can move 1 model faster then say 10 models.

A unit moves at a speed of a slowest model.
Can I move slowly Autarch on a jetbike and then move whole unit of banshees 12" if I make my hand go faster while moving other models? Awesome!

DeathReaper wrote:the unit must move as fast as possible.

We know what a unit is.

Q: What is as fast as possible?

A: Covering the most distance in the shortest amount of time.

well the time is 1 movement phase, this we know.

So the most distance one unit can cover is 6" (Less if in DT depending on your roll of 2D6)

So the unit must move 6", this 6" move must be towards the closest visible enemy.

If the unit ends up 6" closer to the enemy (Less if in DT depending on your roll of 2D6) then the unit has moved as fast as possible and we have satisfied the Rage USR.

Sorry, apparently you're not allowed to use distance when determining speed, according to the dissenters.

I love quotes out of context. That applies to mixed units of different types.

rigeld2 wrote:Sorry, apparently you're not allowed to use distance when determining speed, according to the dissenters.

And apparently to determine the speed one needs to measure only distance to one selected randomly reference point. Sure, sure..


I have another, bonus query about rage (not sure if connected):

3 models on the left rage towards the one on the right. The distance to the fence is 2" from the both units. The closest passable route from units is 12".
Does pink unit hug the fence and move 2" or try to go around the fence and move 6" (typical)?

Macok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Sorry, apparently you're not allowed to use distance when determining speed, according to the dissenters.

And apparently to determine the speed one needs to measure only distance to one selected randomly reference point. Sure, sure..

Based on the rules, that is correct.

BRB Page 3 wrote:When measuring distances between two units, use the
closest models as your reference points, as shown in
the diagram below. So, for example, if any model in
a unit is within 2" of an enemy unit/model, the unit is
said to be within 2" of that enemy unit/model.

rigeld2 wrote:

Macok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Sorry, apparently you're not allowed to use distance when determining speed, according to the dissenters.

And apparently to determine the speed one needs to measure only distance to one selected randomly reference point. Sure, sure..

Based on the rules, that is correct.

BRB Page 3 wrote:When measuring distances between two units, use the
closest models as your reference points, as shown in
the diagram below. So, for example, if any model in
a unit is within 2" of an enemy unit/model, the unit is
said to be within 2" of that enemy unit/model.

That has nothing to do with speed.

Macok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Macok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:Sorry, apparently you're not allowed to use distance when determining speed, according to the dissenters.

And apparently to determine the speed one needs to measure only distance to one selected randomly reference point. Sure, sure..

Based on the rules, that is correct.

BRB Page 3 wrote:When measuring distances between two units, use the
closest models as your reference points, as shown in
the diagram below. So, for example, if any model in
a unit is within 2" of an enemy unit/model, the unit is
said to be within 2" of that enemy unit/model.

That has nothing to do with speed.

Really?


So if the unit went from 7" to 1" did it move as fast as possible?
How about if it went from 7" to 6"?

How can you tell?

Macok wrote:That has nothing to do with speed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_determine_speed
Yeah, distance has nothing to do with speed.

edit: So if distance has nothing to do with the rule, how do you determine compliance Macok?
Remember, no measuring involved.

DeathReaper wrote:the unit must move as fast as possible.

We know what a unit is.

Q: What is as fast as possible?

A: Covering the most distance in the shortest amount of time.

Weird, I can't find this in the rulebook, what page does it specify that this is the definition of "fastest"?

rigeld2 wrote:

Macok wrote:That has nothing to do with speed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_determine_speed
Yeah, distance has nothing to do with speed.

edit: So if distance has nothing to do with the rule, how do you determine compliance Macok?
Remember, no measuring involved.

I'm not saying that distance has nothing to do with speed. The rule he quoted has nothing to do with speed. THAT is what I wrote, please stop putting things in my "mouth".

What I am saying is why is rage target used to determine distance -> speed. And why is only that unit determined for that one purpose?
Could you also answer my bonus question...?

Testify wrote:Weird, I can't find this in the rulebook, what page does it specify that this is the definition of "fastest"?

There isn't one. So you have two options:

1) The word means nothing and is fluff. This makes Rage pointless, so this option should be discarded.
2) You go with the normal meaning of the word - highest speed. Speed is distance over a period of time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Macok wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Macok wrote:That has nothing to do with speed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_determine_speed
Yeah, distance has nothing to do with speed.

edit: So if distance has nothing to do with the rule, how do you determine compliance Macok?
Remember, no measuring involved.

I'm not saying that distance has nothing to do with speed. The rule he quoted has nothing to do with speed. THAT is what I wrote, please stop putting things in my "mouth".

Except it has *everything* to do with speed. Speed is defined as distance over time. Time is one movement phase. Distance is measured as I quoted.

What I am saying is why is rage target used to determine distance -> speed. And why is only that unit determined for that one purpose?

What? I'm not sure what you're asking here.
You measure to find the closest unit. Then you're required to move towards that unit. Measuring to another unit doesn't mean anything...

Could you also answer my bonus question...?

By your interpretation:
All 3 models in the Rage unit would move to the fence and stop, and be unable to move otherwise.

By a sane interpretation:
The unit moves to go around the fence while leaving one model as close as possible.

rigeld2 wrote:

Testify wrote:Weird, I can't find this in the rulebook, what page does it specify that this is the definition of "fastest"?

There isn't one. So you have two options:

1) The word means nothing and is fluff. This makes Rage pointless, so this option should be discarded.
2) You go with the normal meaning of the word - highest speed. Speed is distance over a period of time.

Or a third option:
3)GW want the player to move every model as close as possible to the nearest enemy but phrased it sloppily
RAW supports none of these options, so you preferring your own other the other is subjective and, once again, has nothing to do with RAW.